G V 



WHICH WAS RIGHT? 



A STORY OF AN INTERNATIONAL 
YACHT RACE 



BY 



CAPTAIN J. G. JOHNSTON, 



OF KEY WEST. 



New York : 

A. G, SHERWOOD & CO., Printers, 

1898. 



■ 1 







Book 



Copyright If. 



COPYRIGHT DEPOSIT 



n 1^ 






WHICH WAS RIGHT? 



A STORY OF AN INTERNATIONAL 
YACHT RACE 



BY 



CAPTAIN J, G. JOHNSTON, 



OF KEY WEST. 



Copyright, 1898. 



New York: 

A. G. SHERWOOD & CO., Printers. 

1898. 
I 



9-2073 






WHICH WAS RIGHT? 

A Story of an International Yacht Race. 



EARLY in the month of November, 1694, great interest was 
aroused among the American people by the announcement 
published in the newspapers that an English sportsman had de- 
cided to issue a challenge for a contest to decide the ownership of 
the great international yachting trophy. Details were lacking, but 
sufficient information had been forthcoming to indicate that a 
determined effort was to be made by the Englishman to recover 
the coveted cup. Time and again had attempts been made to 
win back the emblem, symbolical of supremacy in the sport 
of yachting, which had been brought to America years before 
by a boat whose name had jDeen thereafter indissolubly connected 
with it. Each time the Englishmen had sent over their best boat, 
manned and captained by their most experienced sailors. Each 
time they had been met and defeated by a superior boat manned 
and captained by better sailors. Each defeat had apparently only 
added to the intensity of the desire to recover their lost prestige, 
until at the time this latest attempt became known to the public 
there was not a man, woman or child in the tight little isle who 
did not consider himself or herself to have a direct personal in- 
terest in the success of the enterprise. 

It was not at all surprising that this feeling should be dupli- 
cated, though obviously inspired by a directly opposite desire as 



4 WHICH WAS RIGHT ? 

to the outcome, in the people of this country. True, repeated, 
unqualified success had somewhat dulled the intensity of the 
popular interest. This was noticeable particularly when the 
first announcement was made. But when, during the following 
month of December, details of the challenge were made public, 
and it was realized that a greater and more determined effort 
than ever was to be made to take the cup from us, popular feel- 
ing was awakened and the subject became the all-absorbing 
topic of conversation. 

This interest was increased somewhat by the fact that at 
the outset seemingly unsurmountable obstacles appeared to rise 
up in the path of the diplomatists to whom had been intrusted 
the arrangement of the details preliminary to the acceptance of 
the challenge. To prevent the Americans from being taken un- 
awares by a not too scrupulous challenger, there had some years 
previously been executed a deed of gift of the trophy to the 
leading yachting organization of this country, by which it was 
hedged about by stringent and clearly defined conditions. These 
conditions had not been fully observed in the challenge that had 
been issued, and a controversy arose, which at one time threat- 
ened to end in the breaking off of all negotiations. 

Voluminous correspondence passed between the representa- 
tives of the persons directly interested in both countries. The 
newspapers on both sides of the Atlantic took up the discussion, 
and a decidedly varied, if not absorbing, battle was waged. 

Finally, a compromise was reached by concessions being 
made by both sides, and early in the following year the condi- 
tions of the prospective race were agreed upon. The decision 
was hailed with delight by the public. The people had become 
wearied by the long drawn out controversy, but now that a race 



WHICH WAS RIGHT ? 5 

was assured, past differences of opinion were forgotten and 
contentions forgiven. 

There now arose in America the question as to who should 
build the boat that was destined to meet the Englishman. Pre- 
vious experience in that connection prompted certain wealthy 
yachtsmen to keep well in the background during the prelim- 
inary discussion of the question, but withal there were hundreds 
of ambitious sportsmen ready to lend a helping hand and become 
identified with an enterprise that, judged from the view-point of 
popularity, promised to be satisfactory, whether crowned by a 
successful issue or not. 

Discretion marked the selection of the organization having 
the matter in charge, however, and three of the wealthiest and 
most popular yachtsmen in the country were chosen. There 
were many who were disappointed naturally, but so well was 
the choice received by the press and public, that no word of dis- 
satisfaction was allowed to extend beyond their immediate circle 
of friends and sympathizers. Two of the gentlemen selected, 
as chance would have it, were men of vast business enterprises. 
The third, as chance would also have it, was a gentleman of 
leisure. To the latter naturally fell the arduous task of attending 
to the details of the construction of the boat. As a matter of 
fact, he was given entire charge of the enterprise, with carte 
blanche as to expenditure. 

It was decided at the outset that nothing but the best that 
this country could produce in the shape of a yacht would meet 
the requirements of the occasion. To this end the foremost 
builder of racing yachts was communicated with. Several con- 
ferences between the gentlemen composing the syndicate and 
the builder were held, with the result that it was finally agreed 



6 WHICH WAS RIGHT ? 

that all details should be left to the builder and the gen- 
tleman having the greatest amount of time to devote to 
them. 

Preparations for the construction of the boat were made 
forthwith and work on it was started at once. The greatest 
secrecy was observed. No one, with the exception of the 
builders, the active member of the syndicate and the workmen 
engaged, was allowed near her. This secrecy, it was announced, 
was necessary to prevent the exact model of the boat from be- 
ing made public, thereby giving the English adversary a pre- 
sumed advantage. To so great an extent was this precaution 
carried, that different workmen were employed to construct dif- 
ferent parts of the boat. Thus it transpired that, when com- 
pleted, there were only two or three of the vast number of men 
who had been at work upon the boat who were conversant with 
all the details of construction. 

During the months that elapsed while the boat was being 
built, little items concerning her were allowed to find their way 
into print, just enough to keep up public interest, without giving 
the least idea of what was actually being done. All that was 
definitely known was that she was built of metal, upon lines 
that experience had proved to be the most desirable. 

So well had the plans of the builder succeeded, that, when 
the boat was ready for the water, only himself, the manager of 
the syndicate and two or three trusted employes were conver- 
sant with the entire construction. She was launched in June, 
after considerable difficulty, because of the faulty construction 
of the cradle which had been built to carry her down the 
ways. As soon as she was in the water, work on fitting her 
out was begun. The best riggers and sailmakers in the coun- 



WHICH WAS RIGHT? 7 

try had been engaged. Nothing that experience had taught or 
science could suggest in this respect was left undone. 

When completed, with every rope, block and sail in posi- 
tion, experts of all shades of opinion pronounced her perfect. 
She was, indeed, an ideal racing machine. Graceful as a swan, 
her appearance filled the yachtsmen who saw her with an en- 
thusiasm that was communicated with such good effect to the 
general public through the medium of the newspapers that it 
became universal. Columns upon columns of description were 
written and eagerly devoured by the reading publrc. It was 
conceded on all sides that the acme of yacht building had been 
reached, and that a boat worthy to represent this country had 
been produced to meet the venturesome Englishman. 

This feeling of enthusiasm and the confidence that it natur- 
ally inspired, was measurably increased when the boat was put 
to the test. She was given two or three private trials, and then 
pitted against the entire fleet of the foremost yachting organiza- 
tion of this country. 

Her success was phenomenal. Nothing in all that vast fleet 
could approach her -during the cruises from one port to another. 
As stiff as a house in heavy weather, she was as fast as a witch 
in a light wind. The newspapers detailed their expert reporters 
to follow the fleet during the cruise, and the glowing accounts 
of the new boat's wonderful performances that were printed 
kept public feeling keyed up to the highest pitch of enthusiasm. 

After the cruise had ended, the boat was overhauled and 
prepared for a series of trial races. These trial races had been 
previously agreed upon, in order that no mistake should be made 
in the selection of the boat to protect the cup, providing the one 
constructed by the syndicate did not come up to expectations. 



8 WHICH WAS RIGHT? 

The boat chosen as the newcomer's competitor in these trial 
races was conceded to be the best previously constructed. She 
had beaten all comers at all times, and had successfully defended 
the trophy against an English boat in a series of the most ex- 
citing races ever sailed for the cup. 

The outcome of the trial races was discounted by public 
opinion. The new boat succeeded in winning two of the three 
races in such a decisive manner as to leave no doubt in the mind 
of anyone as to which was the better yacht. She would have 
won all three were it not for the fact that, during the second 
race, she met with an accident that virtually crippled her. 

The committee to which had been delegated the power of 
selection met, and, merely as a formality, publicly announced 
that the new boat had been chosen to represent this country in 
the international contest. 

While the foregoing had been transpiring, the English boat 
had arrived on this side of the Atlantic. She crossed the ocean 
unaccompanied, and during the twenty-two days of the voyage 
had proved herself to be as seaworthy as she was fast. Her 
owner had also arrived, and from the deck of his boat had 
watched the trials of the two Americans. The English boat 
had many admirers among the thousands who inspected her, 
and it was admitted that she would prove at least a worthy 
rival. 

Everything progressed smoothly as the dates for the inter- 
national contests drew near. There was not a hitch in any of 
the arrangements, public interest had been maintained by de- 
tailed accounts of the almost daily spins of the two rivals, and 
all went as merrily as the proverbial marriage bell. 

Shortly before the day set for the first race, in the first part 



WHICH WAS RIGHT t 9 

of September, both boats were specially groomed for the fray. 
Rigging was overhauled, sails tried and set, blocks retested and 
everything made taut. 

When the English boat arrived, it had been discovered that 
she did not have on board any of her fittings, water tanks, bulk- 
heads, etc. There was a rule of the club under which the races 
were to be decided, requiring yachts to sail in such races with 
their tanks, fittings, etc., on board, as when prepared for ord- 
inary use. To meet this exigency, a clause was inserted in the 
detailed agreement for the races, waiving this rule. In order 
that the American boat should not be placed at any disadvantage, 
it was decided to strip her also. Accordingly her fittings, tanks, 
bulkheads, etc., which she had carried in all the trial races, were 
removed. They were found to weigh in the neighborhood of 
7,000 pounds. To replace this weight, three tons of pig lead 
were cut and placed in her hold. 

Two tons were put in while she was at her anchorage. The 
remaining ton was placed in her just before she was officially 
measured. This ton was cut and stowed while she lay at anchor, 
near the starting point, the night before the date of the first race. 

It had been agreed that the match should be the best three 
in five races, the courses for each race to be fixed by the regatta 
committee appointed to supervise the contests. Every arrange- 
ment had been perfected several days before the date set for the 
first race. The day previous to the first event the boats were 
measured by the official measurer of the yacht club and were 
found to be so evenly matched that there was a difference of 
only a few seconds in time allowance. This difference, by the 
way, was in favor of the American boat. 

At last the impatiently awaited day arrived. Thousands of 



.10 WHICH WAS RIGHT? 

sightseers, eager to watch the battle between the best yachts in 
the world, crowded every description of excursion boats. Hun- 
dreds of craft, from the great three-decked steamer to the tiniest 
tug, were clustered around the starting point when the contest- 
ing yachts arrived. 

The weather was almost perfect for yachting, The sun 
shone brightly, the sea was calm, and the wind registered from 
five to eight miles an hour. Such a scene of enthusiasm as was 
witnessed when the two boats were sent away on their thirty 
mile trip will never be forgotten by those persons who were 
fortunate enough to be present. The echoes of the starting-gun 
were drowned by the shrill chorus of whistles from the steam- 
ers as the two racers, with every stitch of canvas spread, 
crossed the line. 

It was a beautiful race, unmarred by anything approaching 
an untoward incident. The enthusiasm of the spectators, as 
the steamers accompanied the flying beauties, was unbounded 
at the start. It increased immeasurably as the race progressed, 
when it was observed that the American champion was proving 
herself the better boat. It reached an almost hysterical climax 
when, several hours later, the American boat, skimming like a 
bird over the surface of the water, crossed the finishing line 
about nine minutes ahead of her competitor. 

The Englishman had been beaten, as had been anticipated, 
but he had not been disgraced. His boat had proved herself a 
wonder, and had caused even the most sanguine of partisans 
to express thankfulness that the American builder had suc- 
ceeded in producing such a marvelous craft. It was realized 
that any of the boats previously built in this country would 
have been defeated. 



WHICH WAS RIGHT ? I I 

It was, indeed, a most auspicious beginning to what prom- 
ised to be the most famous contest ever held, and the committee 
having the affair in charge were congratulating themselves on 
that fact, when a change came over the scene. 

That evening they received from the Englishman a request 
that both yachts be remeasured before the next race. Had 
lightning out of a clear sky landed in their midst, they would 
not have been more astonished. What did it mean? Could it 
be that the Englishman thought that the correct measurements 
had not been taken by the official measurer ? 

The knowledge that the Englishman had made such an un- 
precedented request flew like wild-fire from one end of the 
country to the other. The newspapers of the next day were 
filled with it. It was denounced on all sides as a slur on the 
honesty of American yachtsmen, that should be met with the 
most vigorous resentment. Some even went so far as to counsel 
that the Englishman be forced to indite an apology before the 
next race should be sailed. 

The details of the controversy that had arisen were care- 
fully guarded. Everybody connected with the affair declined to 
talk, but it was formally announced that evening that the request 
of the Englishman had been granted, and that both yachts would 
be remeasured. 

Despite the fact that the day following the first race was 
Sunday, the official measurer of the yacht club visited the boats 
and remeasured them. It was found, to the satisfaction of 
everyone, that the load water line of the American boat did not 
differ materially from the measurements taken before the first 
race. By agreement, each boat was marked on the load water 
line. This apparently settled the question, and, though the 



12 WHICH WAS RIGHT? 

feeling of resentment occasioned by the Englishman's request 
had not entirely disappeared, preparations were made for the 
second race., which was scheduled to be sailed the following 
Tuesday. 

Public feeling had been aroused by the action of the Eng- 
lishman to such an extent, that the rush to witness the second race 
was even greater than that which had taken place on the first day. 

Unfortunately, while manoeuvring for a start, a foul oc- 
curred by which the American boat was the greatest sufferer. 
Soon after crossing the line, when it was discovered that mate- 
rial damage had been inflicted to the rigging, the American boat 
hoisted a protest flag, claiming a foul. Both boats continued 
over the course, the Englishman winning by the small margin 
of fifty-seven seconds, corrected time. 

After the race, the representative of the American boat 
lodged a formal protest with the race committee. The commit- 
tee, after due deliberation, decided that the English boat had 
broken Section 11 of Rule 16 of the rules of racing, and 
awarded the race to the American boat. 

This, of course, gave rise to a great deal of discussion, and 
the excitement of the public grew apace. It was as nothing, 
however, to what followed. 

The next race was scheduled for Thursday. Both boats 
appeared at the starting point, ready for the battle. The gun 
was fired, the crowds on the excursion boats cheered. Every- 
thing indicated a great contest. To the great surprise of the 
people, however, the English boat, after crossing the line, turned 
about and headed for her anchorage, leaving the American boat 
to go over the course alone. This she did, and was afterward 
formally awarded the race. 



WHICH WAS RIGHT ? 1 3 

The feeling engendered by the action of the English boat 
was bitter. Nor was it lessened to any extent when it was 
publicly announced that the Englishman had refused to compete 
in the third race, because he was convinced that he would not 
be accorded a clear field by the excursion boats. He was de- 
nounced on all sides and declared no sportsman. 

The unhappy circumstances attending the outcome of what 
had at first promised to be one of the greatest sporting events 
of the century had about been dismissed from the public mind, 
when the yachting world was startled by the publication, in an 
English paper, of charges made by the owner of the English 
yacht, reflecting on the integrity of the managers of the Ameri- 
can boat. 

The charges were, briefly, that the American boat was 
more deeply immersed on the day of the first race than she was 
when she was measured on the day previous, or on the day fol- 
lowing, when she was remeasured. It was contended that this 
fact gave her an undue advantage. The Englishman did not 
pretend to account for the ^change in the water line that he 
claimed he had observed, but indicated that it must necessarily 
have been caused by a manipulation of ballast. 

These charges were a great surprise to the American public. 
Nothing of the nature had ever been hinted at, even when the 
Englishman had requested that the yachts be remeasured. The 
effect was startling, and a demand for public retraction of the 
charges was made by every newspaper in the country. 

So persistent was the demand that the yacht club, under 
whose auspices the races had been sailed, at the request of the 
members of the syndicate owning the American boat, appointed 
a committee to investigate the charges. 



14 WHICH WAS RIGHT ? 

Three of the most prominent men in the country were 
chosen, and they, acting within the power granted them by the 
yacht club, added two more equally prominent gentlemen to the 
committee. Complete, it was as august a court as ever convened 
to consider any question. It had no standing, in a judicial 
sense, of course, and could not compel witnesses to testify 
under oath, but nevertheless the high character of its members 
made it certain that its investigation would be fairly and satis- 
factorily conducted. 

Within a few weeks all preliminaries had been completed 
and the investigation begun. It was conducted behind closed 
doors, and the members of the committee, as well as the wit- 
nesses called, were pledged to secrecy. The owner of the Eng- 
lish boat had made the trip to this country, accompanied by his 
counsel, especially for the purpose of reiterating the charges in 
person. He was the first to be heard. 

Through his counsel, he made a detailed statement of the 
position he had taken in the controversy. He claimed that the 
charges he had been called upon to prove were not new. That 
they had been made to a representative of the committee on the 
day of the first race. In an affidavit submitted he stated in 
part: . . . 

" On the day before the first race I saw the American boat. 
I . . . looked at the port side . . . and specially noticed 
an outlet hole about midships, which was just cut by the water, 
a little above the base. ... I also distinctly noticed the 
line of bronze plating, and also the bobstay bolt. ... On 
the morning of the day of the first race I was awakened . . . 
and requested to look at the American boat. I looked at her 
carefully through a pair of glasses and I was convinced that she 



WHICH WAS RIGHT ? I 5 

was lying deeper in the water than when measured. . . . 
When I went to put ... on board the American boat my 
representative, ... I inspected her with great care to see 
whether the pipe hole and other marks which I had previously 
observed were in the same position as when she was measured. 
The outlet hole on the port side was nowhere visible above the 
water, and in my judgment and belief the line of bronze plating 
and bobstay bolt were nearer to the water than when she was 
measured. . . . I came to the conclusion, which I still be- 
lieve to be a true conclusion, that the vessel was immersed three 
or four inches deeper in the water than when she was meas- 
ured. . . . 

"When a member of the committee came on board my 
boat as a representative of the American yacht, I stated that I 
was sure that the American boat was not sailing on her measured 
length, but was more deeply immersed. ... I said that I 
wished the committee to put one of their members, or some re- 
liable representative on board each of the yachts immediately 
after the race, and that they should be remeasured the same 
evening, if possible, but if that were impossible, that the repre- 
sentatives of the committee remain on board the yachts until 
remeasurement took place. . . . Immediately after the race, 
I put the American representative on board the committee boat 
for the purpose of laying my complaint and requests before the 
committee. ... I received no communication from the 
committee. . . . Both vessels were remeasured on the fol- 
lowing afternoon and their load water line was found to.be the 
same as when originally measured. . . ." 

After the reading oi the affidavit, the counsel for the manager 
of the American syndicate examined the Englishman at length, 



1 6 WHICH WAS RIGHT ? 

with reference to the question of deeper immersion and the possi- 
ble means of securing it. The examination proceeded as follows: 

Q. — Did you form any idea ... of how much deeper 
she was in the water than when measured ? A. — Three or four 
inches, I think. . . . 

Q. — Does not your judgment involve the conclusion on your 
part that twelve or fourteen tons had been secretly been put on 
board of her? A. — No, certainly not. 

Q. — How much ? A. — If you assume that the alteration in 
immersion was made by lead, and take my lowest estimate of 
three inches, ... it would take about nine or ten tons. I 
have nowhere stated that I believed that the immersion was 
caused by the introduction of ballast — lead. 

Q. — Introduction of something? A. — Introduction of 
something . . . 

Q. — But you never formed any idea as to what was intro- 
duced ? A. — No. 

Q. — But your belief was that some substance or substances 
to the amount of nine or ten tons had been secretly introduced 
into her after she was measured . . ? A. — Yes. . . . 

Q. — Did you think that nine or ten tons of material could 
be loaded . . . without its being known to a considerable 
number of people ? A. — Lead could not be loaded, of course. 
. . . I presume water might be introduced without its being 
known to a number of people. 

Q. — Did you believe that water had been introduced ? A. — 
I really had no opinion as to what was done. . . . 

Examined by his own counsel as to the probable reason for 
the American boat being more deeply immersed on the day of 
the first race, the Englishman testified as follows: 



WHICH WAS RIGHT? 1 7 

Q. — Had there been a wind blowing strongly the evening 
before the day of the first race ? A. — Yes. 

Q. — Was there an appearance of heavy weather the next 
day ? A. — Yes; we expected a hard wind the next day. 

Q. — Was that the kind of weather in which, in your opin- 
ion, it would be of advantage for the American boat to be im- 
mersed more deeply ? A. — Yes. 

Several affidavits of persons who had been connected in an 
official capacity with the English boat were introduced by coun- 
sel, for the purpose of showing that the apparent deeper im- 
mersion of the American yacht had been observed by others 
besides the Englishman. One, made by the official sailmaker of 
the English boat, contained the following statement: 

" . . . I carefully observed the American boat when 
the measurement, on the day previous to the first race, was made. 
... I distinctly saw that the load water line intersected the 
outlet of a pipe as nearly as possible amidships. . . . On 
the morning of the next day (while the yachts were lying in 
open water), I noticed that the American boat was lying lower 
in the water than she had previously been. . . . I . . . 
got into a* boat and rowed up to the American yacht to look at 
her closely, . . . and the pipe before mentioned was no- 
where to be seen. . . ." 

Another, from the sailing master of the English boat, said 
in part: 

" . . . I saw the American yacht a day or two after 
the last trial race. . . . Paid great attention to her water 
line and trim, and ... no pipe hole was then visible on 
her port side. I saw her again the day she was measured for 
the first race. . . . She was very much lighter, 



1 8 WHICH WAS RIGHT? 

and I then observed . a pipe hole on the port side amidships. 
. . . It was plainly visible just above the water line. I again 
saw her (on the day of the first race). . . . I was not near 
enough to see the pipe hole, but . . . she was lower in the 
water. I again saw her when she was remeasured . . . 
and then again I saw the pipe hole on the port side." 

Another, from a personal friend of the English owner* 
stated in part: 

" . . . On the day before the first race (while the Ameri- 
can boat was being measured), I distinctly saw a pipe hole in 
the port side amidships. ... On (the next day) ... I 
rowed around the American boat ... I saw distinctly she 
was at that time much deeper in the water than when she was 
measured. I looked for the pipe hole, . . . and it was then 
covered by the water and could not be seen. . . . Both 
yachts were remeasured (the day after the race). ... I then 
saw the pipe hole showing above the water, in exactly the same 
manner as it did when the boat was first measured, and the 
yacht appeared to be at that time in exactly the same trim as 
when she was first measured. . . ." 

The gentleman was examined by counsel for both sides, but 
no further statements of material importance were elicited. A 
number of affidavits from seamen on board the English yacht 
were then submitted to show that unusual activity was notice- 
able on the American yacht during the night preceding the day 
of the first race. 

This ended the case for the English owner, his counsel ad- 
mitting that "we do not propose to go into the question of at- 
tempting, without evidence which we cannot now obtain, to 
attack statements which we have no material to investigate." 



WHICH WAS RIGHT? 1 9 

Counsel for the manager of the American syndicate, in his 
opening address, outlined the policy of the defense, in which it 
was proposed to prove " incontestably, if any human evidence 
can be relied on, that there is no foundation for the charges," 
. . . that the opinions expressed by the Englishmen were 
due to a mere delusion or illusion, by which it appeared that the 
American boat was more deeply immersed on the day of the 
first race than she was on the day she was measured. 

The designer and builder of the American yacht was the 
first witness called. After being interrogated as to the design 
and build of the boat, he was examined by counsel for the de- 
fense as follows: 

Q. — Can you tell . . . how much additional weight 
would have to be placed in her to immerse her four inches 
deeper in the water (than she was when she was first meas- 
ured ?) . . . A. — Four inches would require 28,541 pounds 
(about fourteen short tons). . . . 

In answer to questions, the designer stated that three tons 
of lead ballast had been placed in the hold of the American boat, 
before she was officially measured, to take the place of the 
water tanks, and other articles removed from her when she was 
stripped for the races. 

Q. — Was there any possibility of any water ballast, or any 
other ballast, being used on her that day (the day of the first 
race), except these three tons of lead ? A. — No, certainly not. 

Q. — Could you tell ... if there had been ten or four- 
teen tons of extra weight put into her ? Would you have 
recognized it as she sailed ? A. — Yes; I think I would. 

Q. — How would it have affected her . . . ? A. — There 
would be quite a difference to her motion in a seaway. . . . 



20 WHICH WAS RIGHT ? 



i 



Q. — When you went on board (on the morning of the day 
of the first race), . . . did you see any difference in . . . 
her immersion or the load water length ? A. — Of course, when 
all the crew were on board, with all their cots, that put her 
down somewhat in the water. 

Q. — The . . . crew were on her when she was meas- 
ured, were they not ? A. — Oh, yes. 

Q. — Was there any appreciable weight or difference occa- 
sioned by the cots ? A. — No, . . . There would be very 
little difference in the trim. . . . 

Q. — Had you observed the weather the night before ? A. — 
Yes. ... The wind was fresh, east, and had the appear- 
ance of being a strong breeze the next day. We expected a 
stormy day. . . . 

Q. — (By member of committee.) — What was this hole in 
the side we hear so much of ? A. — It was the delivery to the 
bilge pump. ... It was intended to be just above the 
water line. 

Q. — (By counsel for Englishman.) — Do I understand that 
the cots were on board (when you arrived on the boat, between 
8 and 9 o'clock on the morning of the day of the race) ? A. — 
I do not remember whether they were on board then or 
not. ... 

When the committee convened for the second day's session 
the designer of the American boat was recalled and further ex- 
amined by counsel for the manager of the American syndicate. 

Q. — You spoke yesterday of a leak in the boat, will you 
tell what it amounted to? A.— ... I don't know the 
exact amount — probably twenty or thirty gallons (a day). . . . 
When she was under sail she leaked a little more. 



WHICH WAS RIGHT? 21 

Q. — . . . How much (would) a list of one degree 
change the position of the water pipe in relation to the water 
line ? A. — Well, . . . heeling her one degree would im- 
merse her side amidships something over two inches. 

Q. — How much weight would it take to do that ? A. — 
. . . About one-half or . . . three-quarters of a ton. 

Q. — (By member of committee.) — Did you say whether 
the tanks had been taken out of the boat ? A. — Yes. 

Q. — What was the capacity of those tanks ? A. — I think 
the water tank had a capacity of some six or seven hundred gal- 
lons. I don't remember exactly. ... There was a water 
tank and a waste tank into which the water ran from basins and 
was pumped overboard. That was taken out. That was much 
smaller. And there was also a large wooden tank, lined with 
zinc, for the storage of ice. 

Q. — That was taken out, too ? A. — Yes. 

Q. — Do you know how much a gallon of sea-water weighs ? 
A. — I don't remember exactly the proportion; it is about eight 
and a half pounds, I think, roughly; sixty-four and three-tenths 
pounds to the cubic yard. 

Q. — (By member of committee.) — Is there any place beside 
the hold where ballast could have been secreted without being 
exposed to ordinary observation ? A. — No. 

In answer to further questioning by members of the com- 
mittee, the witness testified that if all of the crew of the boat 
were on one side it would give her a list of about three or* four 
inches. He was on deck when the Englishman rowed around 
the boat to put his representative on board. He could not re- 
member the number of persons standing on deck on that side 
(the port) when the Englishman arrived. 



22 WHICH WAS RIGHT? 

The representative of the regatta committee, who had been 
on board the English yacht during the races, was then called 
and examined by counsel for the manager of the syndicate. He 
gave a detailed account of the conversation between himself 
and the owner of the English boat regarding the statement 
that the American boat was not sailing on her measured load 
water line. 

Q. — Did he (the Englishman) ask or say that he wished the 
committee to put one of its members, or some reliable repre- 
sentative, on board of each yacht immediately after the race, 
. . . to stay on board in charge of the vessels until they 
were remeasured ? A. — No, sir. 

In answer to further interrogations, he stated that he had 
laid the complaint before the committee immediately after the 
race, and that the committee had ordered a remeasurement the 
next day. 

The owner of the English boat was then recalled and fur- 
ther examined. He reiterated his statement that he had re- 
quested the committee to place some one in charge of the boats 
until they were remeasured. 

Q. — (By English counsel.) — This race was looked upon as a 
very important race and there was a good deal of money on it ? 
A. — I believe so. 

Q. — Which money was of importance, and might be the 

reason of ? A. — (Interrupting.) — I believe there was a great 

deal of betting on it. 

At the close of the morning session the English owner bid 
the committee adieu and sailed that afternoon for England. His 
counsel remained behind to attend to his interests until the in- 
vestigation should end. 



WHICH WAS RIGHT? 2} 

At the afternoon session a personal friend of the manager 
of the syndicate, who had sailed on the American boat from the 
time she was launched, was called. In answer to inquiries he 
stated that the American boat had sailed without any ballast in 
the hold during all the trial races. He corroborated former wit- 
nesses in stating that the 3,000 pounds of lead had been put in 
prior to the date of the first measurement to take the place of 
the tanks and furniture that had been taken out of the boat. He 
stated that the owner of the boat made it a practice to inspect 
the hold of the vessel personally every day. He could not state 
the reason for such personal inspection, but was of the opinion 
that it was not made with the idea of detecting any attempt at 
fraud. 

Another friend of the manager was then called. He was a 
civil engineer and surveyor and had measured the American boat 
some time after the races. She was then stripped of everything 
and was considerably lighter than when in racing trim. His 
measurement had shown that the racing line or load water line, 
which had been officially marked after the first race, was then 
six and one-fourth inches above the water. He did not see any 
ballast in her. He had noticed that there were three pipe holes 
on the starboard side and two pipe holes on the port side. He 
found all the pipe holes lower than the line indicated by the 
marks made by the official measurer, giving the load water line. 

The manager of the American boat was then called to the 
stand. He testified that his first intimation that the owner 
of the English boat had made a complaint was had when he 
read a newspaper report to that effect more than a month after 
the races. He had heard absolutely nothing concerning the 
complaint before that time. He told in detail what had been 



24 WHICH WAS RIGHT? 

done with the boat on the days previous to the sailing of the 
first race. He had not noticed any difference in her trim when 
he boarded her on the morning of the day of the race. 

Q. — (By his counsel.) — You attended the remeasurement on 
the day following the race ? A. — Yes. . . . 

Q. — To your knowledge had anything been taken out of 
her or let out of her in any way from the time she started on 
the race until then ? A. — Nothing, to my knowledge. . . . 

Q. — I will ask you . . . whether any such thing could 
have occurred as has been suggested — either the lightening of 
the boat preliminary to the first measurement, the putting on 
board in any form of any weight to the extent of nine or ten 
tons, or to any amount, and the taking it out again before the 
second measurement, without your knowledge ? A. — I cannot 
imagine that such a thing could be possible. . . . 

Q. — (By counsel for Englishman.) — This furniture and these 
traps and tanks (that were taken out of the boat before the first 
measurement) must have weighed a great deal. Did you keep 
on adding to them in a casual manner, without testing the 
weight that was actually in the boat, or did you fit her up with 
a certain number of tanks and a certain amount of furniture, 
and not add to those during the summer ? A. — They were not 
added to during the summer. 

Q. — In any of the races, at the time when she was fitted 
up with her furniture, did you stiffen her at times by loose 
ballast? A. — Never. . . . 

Q. — When you examined the boat on the morning of the 
day of the first race, where did you look at her hold? A. — 
Two different places, aft and about midships. I mean to say aft, 
that is, coming down just at the bottom of the companion-way. 



WHICH WAS RIGHT? 2^ 

Q. — Where was the lead stowed ? A. — . . . Right 
on top of the keel and between her frames. 

Q. — Whereabouts in the boat? A. — Well, it was a little 
aft of midships. Part of the lead was a little aft of a partition 
that came between the sail room and cabin, which partition was 
left at that time. .... 

Q. — If the statement that the boat was sailing more deeply 
immersed than when she had been measured . . . had been 
known to you, it would have been a matter . . . which 
would affect the race. Your boat would have been disqualified, 
I presume, if it had been found out to be the fact ? A. — Yes, if 
it had been found out so. . . . 

Q. — The tanks upon the boat were movable tanks? A. — 
You could get them out, yes. 

Q. — Were they fixed tanks, according to the design ? . . . 
A. — They were put in there so that they could be taken out any 
time we wanted to. . . . They were under the cabin floor. 

The sailing master of the American boat, who was with her 
from the time she was launched until after the races, was then 
called as a witness. He corroborated what had been said about 
taking out the tanks and furniture and putting in the three tons 
of lead. He testified that between the time when the boat was 
officially measured and the start for the race the next day, he 
had been on board in charge. Nothing in the way of ballast 
had been taken on board the boat after she was measured, and 
nothing had been taken off except the cots and bedding of the 
sailors, which had been used during the night. He also testified 
that to his positive knowledge, nothing had been taken out of 
the boat during the night following the day of the race and pre- 
ceding the measurement the day following. 



26 WHICH WAS RIGHT? 

Q. — (By counsel for manager of syndicate.) — What do you 
say to the suggestion that before the measurement on Friday 
she was lightened to make her set more out of the water, that 
after the measurement nine or ten tons of some heavy substance 
was carried on board of her to immerse her deeper in the water, 
and as much taken out of her before the remeasurement to re- 
store her to her original condition ? A. — I say that there is not 
a word of truth in it. There was no such thing done. . . . 

Q. — Had you noticed the discharge from the pipe on the 
port side when the boat was under way, sailing ? A.— . . . 
I don't remember. . . . 

Q. — Did you notice it at that time (the morning of the day 
of the first race) ? A. — I don't remember that morning particu- 
larly. . . . 

Q. — (By counsel for Englishman.) — How big was the pump 
for this hole ? A. — I could not say what was the size of the 
pump. 

Q. — Were there any other pumps in the boat? . . . 
A. — Water closet pumps. There is always a pump connected 
with a water closet. 

Q. — Had there been a water closet forward on the starboard 
side ? A. — Yes, sir. 

Q. — Was that water closet taken out or not ? A. — No. 

Q. — How many water closets were left in ? A. — Four, 
. . . two on the port side and two on the starboard side. 

Q. — You had three on the starboard side, had you not? 
A. — Yes, sir. ... I want to say, gentlemen, that that boat 
sailed those races with just every pound of weight aboard of her 
that she was measured with, and not a pound more. 

Several members of the regatta committee, which had 



WHICH WAS RIGHT? 27 

charge of the details of the contests, were examined. Their 
testimony was all against the supposition that the American 
boat had carried more ballast of any kind on the day of the race 
than she had when first measured. Their testimony also showed 
that their representative, who had sailed on the English boat, 
had not made known to them the request, claimed to have been 
made by the English owner, that the boats should be taken in 
charge by members of the committee or a reliable representative, 
until they were remeasured the following day. 

The next witness to be examined was the carpenter who 
had been employed on the American boat during all the time she 
was in commission. He described fully what had been done on 
board the boat during the days preceding the first race, corrob- 
orating preceding witnesses in all essential details. 

Q. — (By counsel for manager of syndicate.) — Did you know 
of any place in that vessel where water ballast . . . could 
have been stowed without your knowing it ? A. — No, sir. It 
would have been impossible to put it there. There was no 
place to put it. 

Q. — Nothing to hold water? A. — There was nothing to 
hold water except the hull of the boat. The water would have 
to enter the bilge, if any water was carried aboard. 

Q. — From your knowledge . . . was there anything 
taken into her or out of her (during the days preceding and fol- 
lowing the race), except the three tons of lead and the cots of 
the men? A. — No, sir; there was not. 

The assistant sailing master of the American boat was then 
examined at length. His knowledge of what had taken place 
on board the vessel during the time covered by the investigation 
was complete in consequence of the fact that he had not been 



28 WHICH WAS RIGHT? 

away from her more than an hour at any time. His testimony 
concerning' the amount of lead ballast put into the boat and the 
impossibility of shifting ballast to or from the boat during the 
time between the first and second measurements, was stronger 
even than that of previous witnesses. 

Q. — (By counsel for manager of syndicate.) — Was there 
anything taken out, poured out, or left out of the boat (from the 
time she started in the race until she was remeasured?) A. — No, 
sir. 

Q. — Could there have been without you knowing it ? A. — I 
don't think it could have been done; no, sir. 

The first mate of the boat was then examined along the 
same lines as previous witnesses. His testimony was mainly 
corroborative. He had been employed on the boat since the day 
she was launched. 

Q. — (By counsel for manager of syndicate.) — You had 
become by this time pretty familiar with the boat, had you not ? 
A. — With the upper part of her; yes, sir. From the deck, I mean. 

The second mate was then interrogated. He stated that he 
was familiar with the hold of the vessel and had been instructed 
to look for water in the bilge several times during the race. He 
had gone below three or four times and had not discovered any 
water. 

Q. — (By counsel for Englishman.) — Did you notice the pump 
by the bilge amidships? There was a pump there ? A. — Yes, 
sir; there is a pump there. 

Q. — What size is it ? A. — Well, I never took exact notice, 
but I should say it was an inch and a quarter discharge. 

Q. — Is there a pump forward ? A. — No bilge pump forward ; 
no, sir. 



WHICH WAS RIGHT? 29 

Q. — Is there a pump forward? A. — This pump was about 
midships. 

Q. — I know, but was there another pump forward ? A. — 
No, sir. 

Q. — Was there a pump on the starboard side forward ? 
A. — No, sir. 

Q. — There was a pipe hole there, was there not, on the star- 
board side, forward ? A. — There is a pipe hole to the closet. 

Q. — Was there a pump there? A. — There was no bilge 
pump to pump the ship out with. 

Q. — Was there a pump ? A. — A water-closet pump, that 
is all. 

Q. — Was that all the pump that was forward on the star- 
board side ? A. — Yes, sir. 

Affidavits from members of the crew containing evidence 
corroborative of previous witnesses and tending to prove the 
charges made by the Englishman to have been without founda- 
tion in fact were submitted to the committee and ordered 
placed on the minutes. 

The first witness called at the last day's session of the com- 
mittee was the captain of the barge that had acted as a tender to 
the American yacht during the time she was in commission for 
the races. His testimony was slightly different from that given 
by previous witnesses. 

Q. — (By counsel for manager of syndicate.) — You were 
captain of the tender ? A. — Yes, sir. 

Q. — Have you brought with you her log of (the time covered 
by this investigation ?) A. — No, sir; I have not. 

Q. — Where is it ? A. — I have got it home. 

Q. — Were you not requested to bring it? A. — Well, now, 



30 WHICH WAS RIGHT? 

gentlemen, I will tell you. I wrote that for my own benefit, 
and I wrote it for the purpose of publishing a book. That is 
what I have kept it for. . . . That is the reason why I 
didn't bring it. . . . 

Q. — I wish . . . you would ,. . . give the move- 
ments of the tender during (the time that elapsed between the 
first measurement of the American boat and the measurement 
after the first race?) A.— Well, if that is going to be published 
in the paper, I don't think I ought to tell. ... I don't want 
to injure myself. 

Q. — The committee is entitled to have it from you. A. — I 
know I have done everything for the committee. I have been 
told to keep my mouth shut and I have kept it shut. I have been 
offered $75 by the newspapers to publish it long ago and 
I wouldn't do it, because I was told to keep my mouth shut. 
. . . They told me not to say anything. I have had outside 
parties come to me to keep still, and I have done it. . . * 

Q. — From the time the boat was first measured to the time 
she was remeasured on the day following the first race, do you 
know of anything being put into her or taken out of her except 
the men's cots and clothes and bags ? A. — Ask me any other 
question, and I am willing to answer anything that won't injure 
me any. . . . 

Q. — (By counsel for Englishman.) — When you stripped the 
boat before the races, do you remember what pumps were left 
inside of her? A. — I don't know how many pumps she had 
on to her. 

Q. — Did you see any pumps ? A. — I don't know. I never 
went down and examined the boat inside. 

Q. — Did you never go down inside the boat ? A. — I have 



WHICH WAS RIGHT ? } I 

been in her lots of times and been all through her. . . . 

Q. — Have you seen her building plans ? A. — I think I did, 
yes, sir. 

Q.— Where? A.— ... I don't think I ought to 
answer that question. ... I don't think it's any of my 
business to say that. 

The captain of the tender was finally dismissed, and the sail- 
ing master of the American yacht recalled and further interro- 
gated. His testimony touched on the impossibility of having 
the yacht remeasured on the evening following the first race. 

Q. — (By counsel for Englishman.) — Was there a bilge pump 
connected with this hole in the port side amidships ? A. — There 
was. ... The pumps operated from the deck. 

Q. — Was there any pump connected with this hole on the 
starboard side forward, that we have heard of? A. — Water 
closet pump. That is a permanent fixture there. . . . 

Q. — There was no bilge pump there ? A. — Not at all; only 
one bilge pump in the boat. 

The official measurer of the yachts was then called to 
identify some drawings of the boat that had been made. This 
ended the taking of testimony and the committee announced 
that the investigation was closed. It was determined by the 
committee that they should visit the yacht as she lay in winter 
quarters. This was done, the counsel for the English owner 
accompanying them. An investigation of the interior of the 
boat, satisfactory to everyone concerned, was made, and the 
committee devoted itself to the preparation of its report. The 
report was formally presented about three weeks after the in- 
vestigation closed. 

In the report the committee carefully reviewed all the evi- 



32 WHICH WAS RIGHT? 

dence, oral and written, that had been submitted. The argu- 
ment throughout was essentially unprejudiced, each fact and 
each statement receiving due consideration and given due 
weight. Whatever slight discrepancies in detail had been dis- 
covered on revision were reconciled, and rough places made 
smooth. As a matter of fact, the evidence produced by the 
manager of the syndicate had been surprisingly uniform, due, 
perhaps, to the able manner in which his counsel had, by adroit 
questioning, kept his witnesses from wandering from a well- 
defined, beaten path. 

After summing up the evidence and weighing it thoroughly, 
the committee stated : 

" Upon a careful consideration of the whole case, the com- 
mittee are unanimously of the opinion that the charge made by 
the English owner (that the American boat sailed the first race im- 
mersed about three or four inches more than she was when first 
measured, and therefore, on a longer load water line) and which 
has been the subject of this investigation, had its origin in mistake ; 
that it is not only not sustained by evidence, but is completely 
disproved ; and that all the circumstances indicated by him as 
giving rise to his suspicion, are entirely and satisfactorily ex- 
plained. They deem it, therefore, but just to the gentlemen 
connected with the American boat, as well as to the officers and 
crew, that the committee should express emphatically their con- 
viction that nothing whatever occurred in connection with the 
race in question that casts the least suspicion upon the integrity 
or propriety of their conduct. . . . And they ask to be dis- 
charged from further consideration of the subject referred to 
them." 

The report was received with every evidence of satisfaction 



WHICH WAS RIGHT? 3 J 

by the public and was unanimously adopted by the yacht club. 
It closed a decidedly unpleasant incident in the history of 
yachting, and the subject was dismissed. To indicate its senti- 
ments in a more forceful manner, the yacht club expelled the 
Englishman from honorary membership, an action which met 
with a popular expression of the sentiment that it " served him 
right." 

Several years elapsed, and during that time the affair had 
almost faded from the public mind. All reference to the contro- 
versy had been carefully avoided in the press, and those persons 
who had been actively connected with it had discreetly refrained 
from mentioning it, either in public or private. It was considered 
for the best interests of the sport to obliterate it, as far as pos- 
sible. 

This plan had succeeded to such an extent that the announce- 
ment that the case was to be reopened on behalf of the English 
owner caused widespread surprise. The intelligence came 
without warning, but ample opportunity was given those inter- 
ested to become familiar with the details of the proposed pro- 
ceeding before the investigation began. 

It is needless to say that the finding of the court of inquiry 
which conducted the first investigation had not met with the 
approval of some persons whose conceptions of right and justice 
were not overshadowed by partisan feelings. The English 
owner and his most intimate friends had apparently accepted 
the verdict. At least, they had not given any public expression 
of disapproval. They were, to all appearances, content to leave 
the case as it stood. 

There were some persons, however, who had become 



34 WHICH WAS RIGHT? 

deeply interested in the controversy, who had determined to 
investigate the matter for themselves. Without informing the 
English owner of their intentions, they proceeded quietly to 
gather whatever evidence bearing on the question it was pos- 
sible to procure. They had not proceeded with their quest far 
before they became convinced that a grave mistake had been 
made somewhere. 

Progress was naturally slow. The greatest obstacles had to 
be overcome and the most scrupulous care was absolutely neces- 
sary to prevent any intimation of the search becoming known to 
the parties on either side. Patience was at last rewarded, how- 
ever, and about three years after the date of the events recorded 
above the case was completed. 

Extensive preparations were made for its presentation. An 
eminent counsel, who had become familiar with the subject, 
was retained to conduct the case. Papers were prepared and all 
was in readiness when the announcement was made. 

The court which convened at the hearing was the most re- 
markable ever called to adjudicate any question. It included 
prominent representatives of all the English-speaking nations of 
the earth. In addition, interpreters of all known languages were 
engaged, in order that the proceedings might be translated and 
read by the peoples of every country in the world. 

Contrary to the method of procedure of the former court 
of inquiry, every effort was made to give the facts brought out 
the widest publicity. 

When the proceedings began, thousands of persons were 
interested spectators. The doors were thrown wide open. 
Nothing was done in secret. All who were interested in the 
matter were able to hear the testimony. After a few prelimina- 



WHICH WAS RIGHT? 35 

ries, made necessary by the extraordinary nature of the pro- 
ceedings, the eminent counsel began his opening address. He 
said : 

"May it please the court, the case which I now desire to 
present for your consideration, though complete in itself, is es- 
sentially a part of one which has previously been passed upon 
by a court of inquiry formed for the purpose of adjudicating it. 
As a matter of fact, it may be properly described as a continua- 
tion of that case. 

"The case referred to was the outcome of a controversy 
arising from certain charges made by the owner of the English 
yacht which was the contestant in a series of races arranged to 
be sailed for a trophy, the possession of which is conceded to 
represent supremacy in the professions of boat building and 
seamanship. The honorable court is presumably familiar with 
the published facts of the controversy referred to, but for the 
purpose of obviating any possibility of a misunderstanding, I 
beg leave to touch lightly upon the important incidents which 
led up to it. 

"During the month of November, 1694, an English sports- 
man, who had been prominently identified with the sport of 
yachting, issued a challenge for a series of races with an Ameri- 
can boat, for the purpose of endeavoring to regain possession of 
a cup, known as the International Trophy, which had been won 
by an American boat several years previously, and had remained 
in the possession of American yachtsmen, despite numerous 
attempts to win it back. 

"After some trifling delay, his challenge was accepted, and 
arrangements made for the contests, which, it was agreed, were 
to take place during the month of September, 1695. I will not 



36 WHICH WAS RIGHT? 

refer to the incidents which occurred during the time which 
elapsed from the acceptance of the challenge to the date of the 
first contest. They have no material bearing upon the case at 
this time. 

"Naturally, an event of such widespread interest and really 
international importance, created more than the ordinary amount 
of public feeling and discussion, and naturally, also, more than 
the ordinary amount of speculation as to the outcome. The 
boats were apparently very evenly matched, and this fact caused 
considerable money to be placed upon the result. There is no 
way in which even an approximate estimate of the amount 
wagered by individuals can be made, but it was common gossip 
in the clubs and in the exchanges that thousands of dollars were 
at stake. 

" I call the court's attention to this fact, not for the pur- 
pose of intimating that it had any effect on what transpired 
later, but entirely with a view to indicating the vast amount of 
interest taken in the contests. 

"On the morning of the day set for the first contest, the 
owner of the English boat became convinced that the American 
boat was more deeply immersed than she had been the day 
previous, when she was measured by the official measurer of 
the yacht club, under whose auspices the races were to be 
sailed. The boats were lying close together, near where the 
starting point for that day's race was to be staked off. 

" In order that he might observe the vessel more closely, to 
prevent any possible chance for mistake that might arise from 
an inspection at a distance, the Englishman entered a small boat 
and rowed around the American yacht. From this inspection, 
he became assured that his suspicion was well founded. 



WHICH WAS RIGHT? 37 

"When the gentleman who, according to the established 
custom, was to sail on the English boat that day as a represen- 
tative of the yacht club arrived, the English owner informed 
him of the suspicions aroused by the appearance of the Ameri- 
can boat. He requested the representative to lay a complaint 
before the regatta committee, and requested that both yachts be 
remeasured that night, after the race. If remeasurement that 
night was deemed impracticable, he then requested that mem- 
bers of the committee or reliable representatives be placed in 
charge of the boats until such time as they could be remeasured. 

"The first part of his request was granted. The second 
was not. The boats were remeasured the following day, but 
during the time that elapsed between the ending of the race and 
the remeasurement, none of the committee nor any representa- 
tive was on either vessel. 

'■ cite this request and the manner in which it was treated 
merely as indicating the feeling which prevailed even at that 
time against the English owner. Had it been granted in its en- 
tirety and representatives placed on board the yachts until they 
were remeasured, we are positive, from what knowledge we 
have gained, that the final result would not have been in the 
least degree affected. 

"The American boat was remeasured the following day, 
and her load water line was found to be within a fraction of an 
inch of the figures obtained at the first measurement. 

"The contests which followed need not be referred to. They 
have no material reference to the matter under consideration. 

"The fact that the English owner had asked for a remeasure- 
ment of the yachts, thereby indicating a suspicion that something 
was wrong, gained wide publicity through the newspapers and 



38 WHICH WAS RIGHT? 

created considerable feeling among the people. ' To avoid, as 
much as possible, further public discussion of the matter, the 
English owner and the members of the regatta committee arrived 
at an agreement that nothing should be stated in reference to the 
load water line of the American boat in any of the official reports 
made upon the races. 

"He left for home with this understanding. In the latter 
part of the following month of October, he read a report of the 
regatta committee in which the load water line question was 
specifically referred to. In answer to the statements contained 
in the report, he issued a pamphlet in which his side of the case 
was stated. A portion of this pamphlet was reprinted in an 
English sporting paper and gained wide publicity. 

"As a result of the discussion which the publications 
engendered, an investigation of the matter was ordered by the 
yacht club. A court of inquiry, composed of prominent gentle- 
men, was convened. The Englishman, accompanied by his 
counsel, appeared before the court, and gave such evidence as 
was then in his possession to prove that his suspicion concerning 
the American boat was correct. The evidence was founded 
almost entirely upon the judgment formed by himself and others 
associated with him by the appearance of the American boat on 
the morning of the day of the first race. His contention was 
that between the time the boat was first measured and the time 
he saw her on the following morning, a great amount of ballast, 
approximating nine or ten tons, had been introduced, thereby 
increasing her immersion and lengthening her load water line. 
He offered nothing more tangible than the evidence of his own 
eyesight and the judgment of himself and others in support of 
his contention. 



WHICH WAS RIGHT ? 39 

"The defense was thorough. Numberless witnesses were 
examined, and by their testimony it was proved to the satis- 
faction of the court that nothing but the proper amount of bal- 
last had been put in the boat. The finding of the court was in 
accordance with the weight of evidence, and can be summed 
up in the following words: 

" ' Upon a careful consideration of the whole case, the com- 
mittee are unanimously of the opinion that the charge . . . 
had its origin in mistake; that it is not only not sustained by 
evidence, but is completely disproved. . . 

" And so the case ended. Now, may it please the court, it 
is not contended that any other verdict could have been rendered 
on the evidence produced at that hearing of the case. But since 
that time there has been secured evidence that, in our opinion, 
justifies this action for a rehearing. 

"The court of inquiry asserted that 'the charge had its' 
origin in mistake.' We propose to prove that it had, but that 
the mistake was not made by the English owner. 

" We claim, and shall later on produce evidence to substan- 
tiate that claim, that the American boat was what is known in 
yachting parlance as a ' trick boat.' That she was so constructed 
that, by means of tanks effectually hidden from the view of even 
an expert, and pipes leading thereto, and a pump attachment, 
water ballast to the amount of 23,870 pounds, or about eleven 
tons, could be introduced and taken out at will. 

"It is, perhaps, preferable that I should here briefly state 
the conclusions that we have arrived at, based upon the evidence 
that has been obtained. The evidence in the nature of the testi- 
mony, affidavits and drawings will be submitted later. 

"The greatest secrecy was observed in the construction of 



40 WHICH WAS RIGHT? 

the boat. She was built entirely of metal, and iron pipes, 
about two inches in diameter, were inserted between the frames. 
This created considerable surprise among the workmen engaged 
upon her, but their suspicions were allayed by the assertion that 
the pipes wefe put in to strengthen her. Among the other 
peculiarities of the design from which she was built were iron 
frames, or braces, which extended from the keel to the floor of 
the hold. These braces were fastened to the frames on the sides 
of the boat. Holes were bored in the bottoms, through which 
the bilge water could run. They were twenty inches apart. 

" When she left the yard where she was built, these braces 
extended fore and aft, from one end of the boat to the other, 
with the exception of two spaces, one forward and one aft, 
where tanks for the holding of drinking and waste water were 
located. These tanks were movable. They could be taken 
' out at will, and braces, similar to those used in the other sections, 
could be inserted. 

"After she had been removed to the anchorage selected for 
her, two steel tanks were made for her. The tanks were taken 
on board in sections. The braces in the midship section of the 
lower hold were removed and the tanks fitted in their place. 
They were firmly fastened to the side frames and keel, and 
extended from the keel to the floor of the first hold. When in 
position, they were directly underneath the steward's compart- 
ment, where were located the ranges or stoves on which the 
cooking for the crew was done. 

"These tanks measured 385 cubic feet, and were capable 
of holding about 2,880 gallons of water. This would be equal 
to 23,870 pounds, or about eleven tons. After the tanks had 
been put in position, the men who had been employed on them 



WHICH WAS RIGHT? 4 1 

were sent back to the yards and were not again allowed below 
decks. A plumber who resided in a distant city was then en- 
gaged to make a connection with two of the iron pipes which had 
been placed between the frames of the boat for the purpose, as 
avowed, of strengthening her. 

"One of these pipes was then connected with what is 
known as a 'syphon pump,' The pump had been procured at 
another distant city and placed in a compartment on the star- 
board side of the vessel, forward, which compartment had been 
constructed to resemble the water closets on the boat. It could 
not, of course, be used as a water closet, and was kept 
locked. 

"The plan was ingeniously devised, and so adroitly exe- 
cuted that not one of the men who had been employed to carry 
it out was cognizant of its entire scope. Each had an idea of 
what was being done, but not one of them was able to com- 
prehend how the scheme was to be worked. 

"When completed, it was almost impossible for anyone to 
discover the existence of the tanks in the vessel. The floor of 
the hold, with the exception of the midship section, was a 
series of hatches, which could be readily removed. But even 
when this was done, as often happened when it was necessary 
to clean out the bilge, the tanks would not be noticed. The 
ends of the tanks resembled so closely the braces which were in 
the forward and aft sections, that no distinction could be 
noticed. The flooring of the steward's compartment, which 
rested on the tops of the tanks, was covered with sheet-iron. 
This, of course, could not be removed. 

"Another peculiarity of the design on which the boat was 
constructed was the fact that her water line was seven inches 



42 WHICH WAS RIGHT? 

above her true water line. The advantage of such an arrange- 
ment is readily apparent. 

" It was announced from the beginning that the boat was 
designed to be sailed without any loose ballast. All weight 
thought necessary to give her a load water line within the limit 
of ninety feet imposed by the conditions was introduced in a 
leaden keel. This keel weighed about eighty-five tons. 

" The attention of this honorable court need not be called 
to the great advantage accorded the boat by the possession of 
the tanks described. It can be easily understood. In heavy 
weather, when the wind blew strongly, the tanks would be 
filled with water by removing the plug or cut-off from the inlet 
pipe. This would increase the ballast to the extent, as before 
mentioned, of about eleven tons, enabling the boat to more 
nearly retain an even keel, and at the same time a larger spread 
of canvas than would have been possible without such increase 
in ballast. In so-called light weather, when only a fair sailing 
breeze prevailed, the water, by means of the pump, could be 
removed from the tanks, and the advantage of less ballast 
would be obtained. 

" The benefits accruing to the plan here outlined were ob- 
served and appreciated on several occasions when the boat was 
given her preliminary trials. During these trials the ballasting 
by means of the tanks was manipulated in such a perfect man- 
ner that her performances astounded yachting men. To use nau- 
tical terms, she was stiff as a church in heavy weather and like 
a witch in a light wind. Her performances in heavy weather 
were especially noted, and she soon came be known as a boat 
of great stability. 

" Let us now return to the time immediately preceding the 



WHICH WAS RIGHT? 43 

first race for the International Trophy. Both boats were offi- 
cially measured the day before the date set for the first race. 
The American boat, naturally, was as light as she could be 
made. In other words, her tanks were empty when the meas- 
urement was taken. During the afternoon of that day there 
was a strong breeze blowing. The weather was threatening, 
and there was every indication that the next day, the day of the 
race, would be a stormy one. 

"There was only one other man on the boat, in addition to 
its ostensible owner, who understood the manipulation of the 
tanks. A conference was held between them, and it was de- 
cided that if the then present condition of the weather continued 
during the night, the tanks were to be filled. The owner left 
the boat early in the evening. 

"The threatening weather lasted until far into the night, 
and in anticipation of its continuance the following day, the 
tanks were filled and the eleven tons of ballast added. 

" It is here that the mistake, referred to in the opening of 
this address and which led to the controversy, occurred. But 
it was made by the man who had charge of the tanks on the 
American boat, not by the English owner. 

"Contrary to what had been anticipated, a change in the 
weather took place toward sunrise of the day of the race. The 
wind died out until there was hardly a fair sailing breeze left. 
Before this discovery was made by the man who had filled the 
tanks, and while the boat, lying in comparatively still water, 
had the extra ballast in her, persons on board the English yacht 
noticed her condition. They readily discerned that she was 
more deeply immersed than she was when they last saw her. 

"The attention of the English owner was called to the ap- 



44 WHICH WAS RIGHT? 

parent fact, and — but the remainder of that part of the story 
has been told before. 

"Now, may it please the honorable court, it is contended 
that if the English owner's request that the yacht should be 
remeasured that night had been granted, the result would not 
have been materially changed. She would have shown the 
same load water line as when previously measured. 

"This can be easily explained. When the American owner 
boarded his boat that morning and realized the unfortunate condi- 
tion of affairs resulting from his trusted employee's failure to prog- 
nosticate the true state of the weather, there is no official record 
showing that he gave utterance to the emotions which undoubt- 
edly arose within him, but it is quite reasonable to suppose, that, 
like a famous historical personage, 'he did a heap of thinking.' 

" It was too late then to remedy the mistake that had been 
made, but as soon as the boat was under way out in the open 
sea, the pump was set at work and the tanks emptied as rapidly 
as possible. They were completely emptied before the race was 
half finished, and the American boat crossed the line a winner 
sailing on the same water line as when she was first measured. 

"The only opportunity that the English owner had of 
proving the correctness of his assertion, was to have refused to 
sail the race until the boats had been remeasured. 

"And now, having thus with more detail than was perhaps 
necessary, recounted the conclusions reached from the evidence 
we have secured, I shall proceed to present said evidence in 
regular order. The first offered is a drawing of the American 
boat marked exhibit 'A.' It gives a side view of the vessel, 
showing the location of the tanks and steward's quarters, and 
the arrangement of the braces in the lower hold: 



46 WHICH WAS RIGHT? 

" May it please the court, I will now offer several affidavits. 
The first is that of John Doe, Sr. 

" ' I, John Doe, Sr., being duly sworn, do depose and say: 
I was employed by the builder of the American yacht, as super- 
intendent of construction. After the boat had been launched 
and taken away to her permanent anchorage, I was instructed 
to build two tanks for her. The tanks were taken on board the 
boat in sections. They were made of sheets of steel. 

"'With the assistance of one other person, I placed the 
tanks in position in the midship section of the lower hold of the 
boat directly underneath the flooring of the steward's section of 
the upper hold. The ends and sides of the tanks reached from 
the keel to the flooring above. They were securely fastened to 
the frames of the boat and could not be removed. 

"'The sides of the tanks covered seven frames. The 
frames were from eighteen to twenty inches apart. When com- 
pleted, these tanks, which were connected by pipes, had a 
capacity of about 385 cubic feet and were capable of holding 
2,880 gallons of water. I do not know how the tanks were con- 
nected on the outside. After my work of putting the tanks 
together and fastening them in position had been completed, I 
was not again allowed to go below deck. I have not, since that 
time, been below the cabin deck of the boat.' 

"The next is from the person who assisted in putting the 
tanks in position. 

'"I, John Doe, Jr., being duly sworn, do depose and say: 
I was employed by the firm that built the American boat as as- 
sistant superintendent of construction. I supervised the making 
of the plates for the tanks ordered for the boat after she had been 
launched and taken away from the yards. The plates were 



WHICH WAS RIGHT ? 47 

taken on board the boat at different times and stowed below. 

" 'When all the plates had arrived, I assisted anotherperson 
in putting them together and making the tanks. The tanks 
were built in the midship section, underneath the cook's galley, 
and reached from the keel to the floor of the upper hold. They 
were connected by means of pipes. 1 have no knowledge as to 
the manner in which they were connected with pipes on the 
outside. After the work of putting the tanks in place had been 
finished I was not again allowed below decks. I have seen the 
boat only once since that time. 

* ' ' By their measurement I know that the tanks had a capacity 
of 385 cubic feet, and would hold, when full, about 23,870 
pounds of water. I did not know what the tanks were to be 
used for. Nothing had ever been said about their use, and I had 
become too wise to ask questions.' 

"The next offered is that of the man who connected the 
tanks with the pipes on the outside leading to the pump and 
intake hole: 

" ' I, George Gordon, being duly sworn, do depose and say : 
I am a plumber, doing business on my own account. One day 
during the spring of 1695, a gentleman called at my place of 
business and told me that he wanted me to do a little job. I 
asked him what it was. He told me it was to make some pipe 
connections on board a boat. I said I would send one of my 
men. He said no, that wouldn't do at all. He said that I must 
go and do the job myself. He promised big money for it. He 
said that he had been recommended to me as a man who could 
be trusted. He said there was nothing wrong about the job, but 
that he didn't want anybody to know anything about it. I asked 
him where the boat was. He said she was a great distance away. 



48 WHICH WAS RIGHT? 

" ' I took what tools I thought I might need and went with 
him to the boat. She was a yacht, and I have since learned that 
she was the boat that beat the Englishman. I went down in 
the lower hold and there found, in the center of the boat, what 
looked at first like a big tank. I found out after that there were 
two tanks, placed close together. The man showed me two 
pipes, the ends of which were close to the bottom of the tank on 
one side of the boat. He told me that he wanted those pipes 
connected with the tank. 

" ' It was a hard job on account of the small amount of room 
I had to work in. But I made the connections all right. The 
man then took me on an upper deck and took me into a small 
room or closet like. It looked like a water closet. In there was a 
large brass pump, unlike anything 1 had ever seen before. I 
began to examine the pump. I was curious to know what it 
was. The man told me to never mind the pump, but go on 
with my work. He said that he wanted a pipe that came up 
near the pump connected with it. I asked him where the other 
pipe was, and he told me it was none of my business. All I had 
to do was to connect that one pipe with the pump. I did that 
soon enough, got my money, picked up my tools and went 
home. 

" 'As I was going away the man told me not to mention the 
job I had done to anyone. I have never seen the boat since.' 

"The next deposition is from the man whose mistake on 
the night preceding the day of the race caused all the trouble: 

" 'I, Richard Roe, being duly sworn do depose and say: I 
was employed on the American boat from the day she was 
launched until she was permanently laid up after the races. I 
was known as one of the crew, but my name did not appear on 



WHICH WAS RIGHT? 49 

the books of the boat in any capacity. I was under orders only 
to the owner of the boat and was responsible only to him. 

" ' It was my duty to take care of the water tanks that were 
located amidships, to let in the water when it was needed, and 
to set the pump working when they wanted the water out. The 
pump was a curious affair, and I never knew exactly how it 
worked. The man who put the pump in showed me how to 
set it going and how to stop it, and that's all I ever knew about 
it. 

• ' ' The pump was situated in a water closet on the starboard 
side. The mouth of the pipe that let the water into the tanks 
was also there. When the weather was heavy and we needed 
more ballast, all I had to do was to pull up the cut-off at the 
mouth of the pipe and the water would rush into the tanks. The 
mouth of the pipe was situated below the water line and was 
always covered, even when the boat had no ballast in her. If, 
as happened several times during the trials, the wind died out 
and we wanted to lighten the boat, all I had to do was to push 
down the cut-off and start the pump working. The water 
would escape through the water closet hole, which was always 
under water, except when the boat was tacking and was heeled 
over on the port side. When this happened, I would stop the 
pump and wait until the boat turned on a tack and heeled over 
to the starboard side. Then I would set the pump working 
again. I was told to be careful about this, for if any one should 
see the water coming out of the pipe hole while the boat was 
heeled over on the port side, it might give the whole snap away. 

" ' There was only one man, to my knowledge on the boat 
besides myself, who understood how to work the pump and 
pipe. That was the man from whom I took my orders and to 



50 WHICH WAS RIGHT? 

whom I was responsible. I am positive that not one of the crew 
knew anything about it. 

" ' On the evening before the first race with the Englishman, 
my employer called me aside and told me that he thought we 
were going to have a stormy day for the race. He said that if 
the weather continued as threatening as it then was during the 
night — that is, if it did not appear to be dying out and that it 
would be stormy the next day — I was to fill the tanks, as the 
boat would need the extra ballast to carry all her sails. 

" ' He left early that evening, after telling me again to watch 
the weather carefully. I did watch it carefully. Along toward 
1 1 o'clock that night it was very threatening and it looked cer- 
tain we would have a stormy day. Before I turned in I pulled 
up the cut-off and let the water run into the tanks. I then turned 
in and slept till day-break the next morning. When I got up on 
deck, I found that the wind had died out almost entirely, and that 
every thing indicated a clear day with little wind. 

" ' I didn't know what to do about it. I knew that the water 
shouldn't be in those tanks in that kind of weather, but I was 
under strict orders never to touch the pump or cut-off unless I 
was told to do so by my employer. When he arrived a few 
hours later he saw at once the fix I had got myself into. He 
blamed me for turning on the water so soon. He said I should 
have waited until I was sure about the weather. 

"'I told him I thought I was sure, that the change happened 
after I had turned in. I suppose I should have waited until morn- 
ing before turning on the water, but I was tired and wanted to 
turn in and I took a chance. 

" ' I asked him what I should do about it. He told me to 
wait. Soon after the boats had started on the race, he told me 



WHICH WAS RIGHT? 5 1 

to start the pump. I did so, and before we were on the return 
to the finish the water was all out of the tanks. We didn't use 
the tanks again. The next day they put marks on the side of 
the boat and I never got word to let the water in again. In fact 
I was never allowed in the water closet again. My employer 
took my key away from me and kept it. 

" 'I don't know how much water the tanks held, but it must 
have been a great deal. It took some time to fill them and a 
longer time to pump them out. I knew it must have been a 
great deal, for the boat was as stiff as a house when they were 
full. You could blow her stick out of her before she would show 
her keel.' 

" And now, may it please the court, we will close the argu- 
ment. We have sought a rehearing of the case because we are 
convinced, in the light of recent developments, that a serious 
error had been committed. The evidence that we have sub- 
mitted is sufficient, in our opinion, to raise a question of reason- 
able doubt, on which this action is based. 

"I have submitted a brief in which are recounted the essen- 
tial points brought out at the first investigation. We will now 
leave it to the honorable court to decide 



WHICH WAS RIGHT?" 



/ / 




LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



029 726 878 8 



* V 



